Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > American
West Merger committee update 6/26 >

West Merger committee update 6/26

Search
Notices

West Merger committee update 6/26

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-26-2015, 01:40 PM
  #21  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: Gets weekends off
Posts: 1,168
Default

Originally Posted by eaglefly View Post
Because doing so on the LAA side is a benefit it will take me many, many years to enjoy, especially now with thousands of new previously non-AA pilots to get their first and as importantly, it's a result that WOULD NOT HAVE OCCURED FOR THAT PILOT ABSENT THIS MERGER as there was no mechanism in sight that would have made this dispute "ripe" ABSENT THIS MERGER AND SLI.

Why can't you understand THAT ?

I think it's possible the consideration of long fences may just become a more simple solution considering what appears the West's (and I suppose now the East's as well) intransigence in believing a pre-merger West F/O making $100/hour who had no pre-merger expectation of pole-vaulting to an American Airline Group III captains slot making $280/hour as a result of this merger when a similarly situated pre-merger legacy LAA pilot must wait many, many years to match that West pilot meteoric financial blast-off.

Again, it's interesting to note how the West chooses merger concepts based on value to them in a given SLI. With US Airways East, pre-merger career expectations as well as individual and carrier financials were fair game, but now in an even MORE differentiated merger and integration, they somehow don't matter.

Interesting.
Well unfortunately that's a part of mergers. You get to fly what they brought and they get to fly what you brought. We have fences, but 90% of pilots can't hold 747, 777 or A-350 Captain so the fences end and that guy who should have been a Jumbo Captain now waits while the guys integrated ahead of him go to those seats.
pilot64golfer is offline  
Old 06-26-2015, 02:25 PM
  #22  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Default

Originally Posted by pilot64golfer View Post
Well unfortunately that's a part of mergers. You get to fly what they brought and they get to fly what you brought. We have fences, but 90% of pilots can't hold 747, 777 or A-350 Captain so the fences end and that guy who should have been a Jumbo Captain now waits while the guys integrated ahead of him go to those seats.
Understood. I think fences are possible here as both LAA and West proposals touch on that (787-A350), but for whom and how long is one question. Arbitrators are loathe to erect fences anymore and thus the resolution to this new paradigm is likely how pilots will be feathered in. The Wests "hybrid" 35% Longevity/65% Stat & Cat philosophy seems weighted in their favor. The junior LAA pilots have suffered as well with substantial furlough times and this proposal just stands to agonize an already badly damaged career path for thousands of them. We also have 1000 junior pilots still on elective furlough, many of which are unlikely to return leaving those still here and junior at even more disadvantage depending on feathering, weighting and ratios as most of them simply may be nothing more then ghosts.
eaglefly is offline  
Old 06-26-2015, 02:56 PM
  #23  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Position: Pitot heat, what's to eat?
Posts: 392
Default

I don't think this ruling means what people think it means. Read the dissent and the majority's footnotes. It very directly and intentionally does NOT order that the Nic is the list. It specifies very clearly that the final result may not be the Nic, and that the Nic is not a necessary outcome to avoid further DFR. All the ruling does is enjoin USAPA from arguing a position other than the Nic. It's a gag order, and as the dissent notes, the point may be moot because Usapa no longer controls the outcome, it only has influence over it.
ackattacker is offline  
Old 06-26-2015, 03:02 PM
  #24  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Position: Done with that
Posts: 191
Default

No one should count their chickens just yet. Next up. En banc (before the entire 9th). This three judge panel was 2 right leaning/ one left leaning. The entire Bench is left leaning majority.
SewerPipeDvr is offline  
Old 06-26-2015, 03:10 PM
  #25  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Default

Originally Posted by ackattacker View Post
I don't think this ruling means what people think it means. Read the dissent and the majority's footnotes. It very directly and intentionally does NOT order that the Nic is the list. It specifies very clearly that the final result may not be the Nic, and that the Nic is not a necessary outcome to avoid further DFR. All the ruling does is enjoin USAPA from arguing a position other than the Nic. It's a gag order, and as the dissent notes, the point may be moot because Usapa no longer controls the outcome, it only has influence over it.
Yes, that appears to be the ruling, but if USAPA (East committee) can't argue any ISL proposal unless it is the Nic and the West proposal already has the Nic, where does that leave the U pilots ?

It would seem by default regardless of the make-up of their committees or committee, the only thing left to put forward regarding their list is the Nic, which again already is the proposal by the West. It would seem the only alteration they could make would be integration philosophy with LAA pilots like a modification to their "hybrid" integration methodology.
eaglefly is offline  
Old 06-26-2015, 03:27 PM
  #26  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Position: Pitot heat, what's to eat?
Posts: 392
Default

Originally Posted by eaglefly View Post
Yes, that appears to be the ruling, but if USAPA (East committee) can't argue any ISL proposal unless it is the Nic and the West proposal already has the Nic, where does that leave the U pilots ?

It would seem by default regardless of the make-up of their committees or committee, the only thing left to put forward regarding their list is the Nic, which again already is the proposal by the West. It would seem the only alteration they could make would be integration philosophy with LAA pilots like a modification to their "hybrid" integration methodology.
I don't know what the future brings but I have a suspicion that the East committee could potentially decide to withdraw completely rather than advocate the Nic, leaving the West and AAPSIC to fight it out over the Nic and APA at risk of DFR to the East.
ackattacker is offline  
Old 06-26-2015, 03:33 PM
  #27  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Default

Originally Posted by ackattacker View Post
I don't know what the future brings but I have a suspicion that the East committee could potentially decide to withdraw completely rather than advocate the Nic, leaving the West and AAPSIC to fight it out over the Nic and APA at risk of DFR to the East.
APA claims neutrality and the LAA committee is autonomous from APA, so I don't see how APA would be in jeopardy from East pilots if their committee excused themselves. Anyway, that would mean the two competing proposals would be the LAA and West (Nic) proposals and arguments.
eaglefly is offline  
Old 06-26-2015, 03:38 PM
  #28  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Position: Pitot heat, what's to eat?
Posts: 392
Default

Originally Posted by eaglefly View Post
APA claims neutrality and the LAA committee is autonomous from APA, so I don't see how APA would be in jeopardy from East pilots if their committee excused themselves. Anyway, that would mean the two competing proposals would be the LAA and West (Nic) proposals and arguments.
APA (and maybe the company) could be at risk of DFR for proceeding with an integration process where all parties are not fairly represented. That's why they wanted the West there in the first place even though APA has no love for the Nicolau. The West committee and the AAPSIC committe have no duty to fairly represent the East, only APA as a whole does as and the committees are a way for APA to show that they treated everybody fair by giving everybody their chance to advocate their position.

USAPA can fairly claim that this ruling states they can't represent the East pilots position so they withdraw, leaving no one to represent the East pilots at all. If APA allows that farce to proceed, they are at risk of DFR.

Long story short expect this process to become even more drawn out the arbitration hearings to be rescheduled.
ackattacker is offline  
Old 06-26-2015, 03:55 PM
  #29  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Default

Originally Posted by ackattacker View Post
APA (and maybe the company) could be at risk of DFR for proceeding with an integration process where all parties are not fairly represented. That's why they wanted the West there in the first place even though APA has no love for the Nicolau. The West committee and the AAPSIC committe have no duty to fairly represent the East, only APA as a whole does as and the committees are a way for APA to show that they treated everybody fair by giving everybody their chance to advocate their position.

USAPA can fairly claim that this ruling states they can't represent the East pilots position so they withdraw, leaving no one to represent the East pilots at all. If APA allows that farce to proceed, they are at risk of DFR.

Long story short expect this process to become even more drawn out the arbitration hearings to be rescheduled.
Well, I agree about the possibility or even probability of delay, but hasn't USAPA (East pilots) tried this tack before ? It wouldn't be much different then when they first agreed to the MOU provisions and then claimed that the very provisions they agreed to were detrimental to their interests and used delay tactics until they got capitulation.

Come to think of it, I now expect exactly that to occur. USAPA (or their core players) are masters of delay and accepted wrench throwers themselves, so I could see that. I don't see the tack of choosing a delay strategy and then blaming APA for it as being a successful one. I can't see USAPA (or their core players) ever being treated with anything less than contempt from any judicial body in the future. Any delay tactics other then short-term ligitimate ones to regroup I'm sure will be vigorously countered and all that takes $$$, much of which that belongs to West pilots is likely to soon be stripped.

Who is going to pay for that this time ?

I wouldn't expect the APA to, nor AAG.
eaglefly is offline  
Old 06-26-2015, 07:29 PM
  #30  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Gomerglideslope's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Posts: 335
Default

Originally Posted by SewerPipeDvr View Post
No one should count their chickens just yet. Next up. En banc (before the entire 9th). This three judge panel was 2 right leaning/ one left leaning. The entire Bench is left leaning majority.
I'm curious as to how "left leaning" or "right leaning" judges play into this?
Gomerglideslope is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
R57 relay
American
150
01-12-2015 07:02 PM
cactiboss
American
18
01-09-2015 09:15 PM
Arado 234
American
694
10-04-2014 05:49 PM
lakehouse
American
3
09-08-2012 04:35 PM
DMEarc
Regional
1249
12-17-2010 10:37 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices